He probably would still be great. But Im not sure his numbers would be as daunting giving the fact the passing attack is actually a part of the game.

He still would be a stud though, the guy was big and fast.

---------------------

"When you suck long enough, you get a Hickey"

Okay A & O, let me use Montequi's question as a starting point. If we had Jim Brown today, we would control the clock and win the games just like we did when we had Jim Kiick and Larry Csonka and Mercury Morris.

A & O, do you know what the most common sportcaster comment was about our losses to Indianapolish and New Orleans (who by the way are the two Super Bowl teams)???

I'll tell you, they say that it was a wonder how we lost those games GIVEN HOW MUCH TIME OF POSSESSION WE HAD.

We lost those games because of turnovers and yes, poor defensive lapses.

However, for a team like us to dominate the 2 Super Bowl teams by time of possession might just tell you that the running game can dominate football.

What was the only undefeated team in NFL History? The 72 Dolphins! Certainly the 1985 Dolphins could outscore any team except Dan Fouts and the Chargers. But if we could dominate time of possession as we did in mid-season when we had our running game clicking, then I'm sorry that proves that you are wrong when you argue that the running game is a vestige of the long past and is not worth what it was in the 70's.

Ask Indy and New Orleans. They might not agree with you because they were almost taken out by that running game of ours.

Aqua&Orange Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
100 years ago the forward pass was not even being
> played. 30 years ago if you threw 30+ passes in a
> game it was thought of as strange and unusual, and
> was mostly unheard of.
>

RESPONSE:

Let's see, 30 years ago were the 80's. The era of Dan Fouts, Dan Marino, etc. 30 plus passes a game UNHEARD OF????

Now it's my turn.

To quote you

BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Actually Dan Marino was still in college in 1980.



BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

---------------------

"When you suck long enough, you get a Hickey"

Sorry Chyren, I guess I should have said 40 years ago, the year your first great-grandchild was born.

---------------------

"When you suck long enough, you get a Hickey"

You have skewered your own argument here. The games you mentioned were won by two passing teams over a running team that had controlled the clock to an extreme degree. Controlling the clock is what a run-first offense is designed to do. This highlights that a quick strike offense will defeat a running team if the running team doesn't have a sufficiently proficient defense in order to prevent the quick strike offense from striking too quickly. Our offense has shown the requisite proficiency in running the ball and controlling the clock, but our defense is insufficient to their task. Therefore, we need to increase our defensive proficiency. Our offense shouldn't change for the next year or two. Also, asking A&O to reason backwards from a given conclusion to a premise is not logical.

Rick

As someone pointed out, the "Fridge" looked like a bowl of jelly also. Yes, I saw A & O's link that showed a picture.